That's exactly what I want. And I'm sure that there are others here who want the same thing. The reason I'm doing this is because I'm far more likely to be successful doing this than anything else.

Bamboozle -- I think you may be confused about an important fact: TSM is NOT a moderation tool. It is a means to get free of the yoke of enslavement to alcoholism. Once we are we free, we will decide whether we choose abstinence or moderation. But it is our choice at that point. Many on our Cured list find they are moving in the direction of abstinence.

Have you had a chance to read any of the information on the board index?

Bamboozle:

We are all alcoholics here fully struggling with life or death issues -- if you think you are the only one here who understands this fact then you are sadly mistaken. And NO ONE here is advocating "moderation" for people, like you, who are successfully abstinent. The issue -- as you know personally for yourself after repeated relapses -- is what, if anything, you will do in order to protect yourself if you relapse? Drink yourself to death or near death as you have repeatedly in the past without taking any precautionary measures? Or, take a pill and expect to be in the 80%+ group who are cured by taking naltrexone one hour before drinking? There is NO REASON not to take the pill if you relapse -- buzz freaks still get their buzz on naltrexone. Virtually none of us would continue on with the method if we didn't. If you choose the former option -- to relapse without taking any precautionary measures whatsoever, e.g. taking naltrexone -- then I respectfully suggest that it is YOU who does not understand the incredible danger of untreated alcoholism.

You yourself correctly state that one cannot be 100% sure of anything. Given this fact, how can you say with 100% certainty that taking naltrexone if, and when, you relapse, would not work for you? You can't. And the reason we are touting TSM so zealously is because we, like you, fully understand that alcoholism is a life and death issue. And we, unlike you, fully recognize that there is a safe, clinically-proven treatment that literally saves the lives of at least 80% of those who are lucky enough to discover the method. And given the ABYSMAL "success rate" of traditional AA-based treatment programs (10-20% would be generous), many of us feel that we would be totally remiss in our duty to fellow sufferers if we kept quiet about TSM.

Bravo, Nick!

Bob

No No Nick! You're delusional. Thats stinkin-thinkin ya see

Anyone who follows AA properly succeeds. I know cos my tennis coach told me. He's brilliant you see. Anyone who always returns the ball into play (step 1 of his advice), never faults (step 2) always wins! 100%!

I was so inspired I came up with a cure for cancer.

You eat 3tbsp of dessicated apricots and hum the following 'mantra' - "Cancer cancer go away, don't come back, weh hey hey". You have to hum it just right (as per the instructions - with feeling and three part harmony), but if you do it cures cancer 100%. Waddabowtdat!

What a complete pile of garbage designed to make alcoholics think they can drink like a normal person. You should be tried for attempted manslaughter. AA works. I have never once in my entire life seen someone in AA who has successfully stopped drinking get drunk. It works, plain and simple, 100% of the time if you're successful.

I really can relate to both 'sides' (for lack of a better word) here.

To the TSM 'side' of things because it's scientifically-proven, with such an incredible and unarguable success rate. But also great feeling for those who are dedicated to abstinence.

I was there myself just recently, and it takes so very much strength, and a large part of that strength (in my experience) was found through trying to accept that I could never drink again. That belief's absolute necessary in my humble opinion if that's the route out of this spiral into darkness (and quite possibly, ultimately, miserable death) that we choose.

Now, again, we on the TSM 'side' know that there's an alternative to that lifelong struggle that has such a low long-term success rate. And a large part of me desperately wants those who are following that path (abstinence through whatever method) to know of this alternative, or safety-net if you will, should they falter (which is most likely given enough time, after all). On the other hand I believe that just offering TSM as an alternative to many of these folk may undermine completely what they are trying to do (because you do need that 100% comitment), and although science is on TSM's side I'm not sure that that is right.

Morally I just don't know what's right or wrong here about taking the 'message' to the abstinent (even though most of them will fail, as we know). I was abstinent just eight weeks ago and in the best shape I had been for years; now I am not and am in so very many ways so much worse. I have a hope of a cure for my alcoholism, but I am a long way from that right now. It could be here in two, three months, maybe never, who knows? That's the risk that I've taken.

These are only my thoughts and in no way a comment on the way I think anyone else should approach these things, or indeed is doing so. I guess I just wish in a perfect world TSM would be widely known about, so that those who choose our path when they are drinking can do that, and those who choose the detox/abstinence/whatever else route can equally. Everyone fully informed and making their own reasoned choices for their own lives, where at the moment the scales are heavily tipped in the wrong direction.

I'm sure there is a 'battle' to be fought here about TSM versus the 'traditional' methods, I just have no idea where the lines should be drawn. My gut feeling right now is that it isn't in online communities where people are struggling with abstinent lifestyles.

Why must it be a battle?

I'm from SR. I'm not part of any gang, like a lot of us over there.

I'm thrilled whenever *anyone* gets sober - whatever definition it is.
If that means they have to stick their head through the hole of a donut to go from hell to happiness, so be it.

I understand evangelism, and commitment, and wanting to help - I even 'get' being pissed off at your reception - but I cannot see at all where this battle mentality, on either side, really helps the majority - the people that really need to be helped.

Let your method stand on it's merits. Forget battles.
If you really believe in something, the very best way to sell it is by your actions.

Let your method stand on it's merits. Forget battles.
If you really believe in something, the very best way to sell it is by your actions.

I completely agree with this statement. And I'm guessing the members of the "cured" club (however you wish to define it) would agree with you. So when someone who no longer has any craving for alcohol and is either entirely abstinent or drinking at safe levels thanks to taking naltrexone, and then attempts to simply describe that experience for others for their consumption/information at SR, and then is blindly attacked as "in denial" or "delusional" or any other AA cliche that comes to mind, then that's where the conflict arises. Also, when I go to my own doctor and explain that I want to try taking naltrexone while drinking and am told blindly and summarily (and in direct conflict with at least 72 clinical trials) that "alcoholics cannot drink", again that's where conflict inevitably rises. So long as the dominant societal position is that no alcoholic should be permitted to extinguish their habit by drinking on naltrexone, then conflict is inevitable. And this conflict is not initiated by those who use naltrexone consistent with the Sinclair Method. This conflict is created by the nay-sayers of the safe, clinically-proven treatment for alcoholism who blindly cling to the unscientific, unsuccessful, faith-based tenets of AA-recovery theory. When those who have succeeded using TSM attempt to let the facts of their own success stand on their own merits, they are unfairly and irrationally attacked by faith-based zealots.

In order to even be there and talk about it, which we're not really allowed to do, we have to defend ourselves. Nobody likes it. The only reason we do it is because the method does stand on its merits. It doesn't matter of how many people refute it the truth shines through if one isn't too ignorant to see it. And some of the people that really need it are watching. Nobody wants a battle, but as soon as we open our mouths we're heretics. There's not much we can do about it except struggle to contain the misinformation, and try to prevent the perpetuation of ignorance (which has been going on since 1978).

All of us here feel exactly the same way you do. Absolutely "thrilled" when anyone finds their way regardless of what it is.

Don't mind what's going on here, we're just venting. It's frustrating, like you have a diamond in your hand and all you want to do is give it to somebody but it shines so bright they don't even want to look at it.

As for being passionate about it, people's lives are at stake. When you stack the effectiveness of this method next to anything else. ****, anything else is like playing Russian Roulette with 5 bullets in the gun.